I have just acquired a Ilford Sporti from the auction site.
Nothing to do with Graflex admittedly.
Can anyone tell me what speed Ilford Selochrome & HP3 would have been in the fifties and what that equates to now.
The instructions mention these two films specifically.
I think the sporti was only a family snapshot camera. Was Selochrome more tolerant of exposure errors than other Ilford B&W? A direct equivalent of Kodak's Verichrome Pan perhaps?
I think Kodak VP was about 125 ASA like Plus X.

Verichrome was a great b/w film. I cried when Kodak pulled it. Ditto for Panatomic-X. Now I use Ilford XP2 Super exclusively, in 120 roll film. Let a lab process (C-41) film, then I scan negs into Photoshop and print digitally. Ah, freedom!

HP-3 is probably ASA 125, much like the HP-4 that replaced it. I don't know about Selochrome, other than to tell you it's probably orthochromatic. The really old B&W films that had "chrome" at the end of their name were ortho. Verichrome changed to panchromatic in '56. They just added Pan to the name. I may have the data on Selochrome around here somewhere but it would take a few days to get the time to find it. Have you checked the Ilford web site? They used to have a forum but I haven't looked in a couple of years._________________Glenn

Poking about on the net, (it seems that insomnia has a use after all);

There seems no acknowledged derivation of the word 'Selo', originally coined in 1920 and which Ilford retained in their 'popular' amateur film 'Selochrome' until c1968. One theory, based upon a phrase within a 1930s book 'How It Is Made', which includes a chapter on film making, is that 'Selo' is an abbreviation for 'Sensitised Celluloid', though a simpler suggestion has been made that it is merely an abbreviation of the word Celluloid.

'FP' was originally an abbreviation for Fine grain Pan film and 'HP' for Hypersensitive Pan. Hence, strictly grammatically, these film names should be abbrevaited to F.P. and H.P. In Amateur Photographer magazine for November 1946 there is an Ilford advertisement which refers to Ilford Selo H.P.3 (note the full stops after the H and P, suggesting abbreviations). By the 29th October 1947 edition, the word Selo has been dropped, but the film is still H.P.3. Then, in a January 1951 AP, the advertisement is for HP3 (no full stops, i.e Ilford have decided to make HP3 a name, not an abbreviation).

Ilford HP3 Roll & 35mm Film first appeared. Initially 125ASA, later 200ASA (around 1952-53). In 1960 the 200ASA emulsion was revised to 400ASA (but there was no actual speed increase, it was in recognition that with better exposure determination methods at that time, there was no longer need for all film manufacturers to include an exposure safety margin).

The same lot of poking about on the net suggests that the Selo was probably 50 ASA, and latterly 100 or 125 ASA.

HP-3 ---- I was thinking of FP-3.
In any event, the Ilford Sporti is a simmple camera and 100/125 would be good for sunny shots. 400 would be good for overcast. That works out pretty well when you don't have much control over exposure.

And Henry, I still have half a brick of VP in the freezer. I use it very judiciously._________________Glenn

That is pretty much what I suspected. I haven't received the camera yet, but I think this is the base model. It is a Dacora Digna with slight changes.
The base model had a simple meniscus lens. The exposure being 1/50th at either f8 or 11 (bright & sunny). Apparently there was a 'cloud' setting where the shutter speed changes to 1/25th sec.
I don't think that your average person would be inclined to want to take a picture if it was anything other than a bright or sunny day. Those exposures would be right for a film around 100ASA.

Now then: What was so fantastic about Kodak V.P.?
Am I right about the extreme tolerance of exposure error?
I wish I had some to try against something else. I am noshing my way through Shanghai GP3 at present. The local price for Ilford is crazy, and that is why I am not using my local photo shops.
I'll keep looking on the auction site to see if I can find some late VP.

Impressive photographic scholarship, Rob! You even credit your sources. If this sort of thing spreads around, the 'net may even become reliable!

Glenn, I shot many a roll of Verichrome 127 in my little cheap Kodak TLR Brownie. Talk about a simple camera---that was one, alright. Still have it, as a matter of fact. BTW, are you freezing Kodachrome, too? I believe it's headed to extinction.

Speaking of film speeds, I find that XP2 Super scans beautifully when exposed at ASA100, two stops slower than its rating. At 400 the negs seems awfully thin to me.

A high-speed, fine grain, panchromatic film with wide exposure latitude. It is an improved replacement for Kodak Plus-X Roll Film as well as for Verichrome Film. It is the first choice for general picture-making use in all types of roll film cameras.
Exposure Index : Daylight - 80 Tungsten - 64
Some filter factors (15 & 47), development charts, sensitometric curves and spectrograms to light were different for rollfilms/packs and for 828 film.
Spectrogram for VP828 was the same as 35mm Plus-X film.

Verichrome Pan was unique in that it had two emulsion layers. One layer on the high side of normal contrast and the other on the low side. It was quite simply the ideal film for simple cameras. One could almost always get a usable picture, despite one's self. Secondly, it produced prints that had a look of their own. Not the sharpest film ever made but results could be stunning under the hand of a good craftsman. It was so easy to work with. I have a lot of little folding cameras that I use my VP in. I guard my remaining stock with a vicious lap dog. And, no, I don't have any Kodachrome. I would really like to try Verichrome (not Pan), pre - '56, when it was still an ortho film. I waited to long. A semi intresting factoid - VP was only made in 120 size, specifically for cameras such as your Sporti, and the wide variety of simple folding cameras. Oh, for some 4X5!_________________Glenn

Dave, are you sure your film pack is Verichrome Pan, or is it Verichrome (no pan)? It doesn't matter much because the 2X3 pack films were actually the same film as the roll film. Just cut into sheets, or short pieces, if you will. It is indeed correct that it was made in 127 size and I should know that. I've certainly shot enough of it in my long gone little Brownie Holiday. Verichrome was made in all roll film sizes but I don't remember if VP continued that tradition. In 1954 when VP came out, things like 116, 616 and 122, for example, were becoming less desireable. Getting old ain't for sissies. I have a very hard time remembering some of this stuff now._________________Glenn